Le lundi 09 février 2009 à 23:16 +0100, Martin Sourada a écrit : > On Mon, 2009-02-09 at 22:42 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Le lundi 09 février 2009 à 21:20 +0100, Martin Sourada a écrit : > > > > > Well, not exactly, but yeah, in a sense it's similar. But don't forget > > > we need to target more platforms than fedora or *nix. > > > > You can always bundle the fonts separately for non *nix users. > > > Well, you can but while it makes the situation easier for the end user, > it still requires them to install the fonts and I'm not sure if that is > reasonably working on windows machines if the user does not have admin > rights. Windows users without admin rights exist? How do they install the video viewing app? > > > > > than requiring your users to either find it themselves and > > > > > install it > > > > > > > > Fedora 11 will have automatic font installation for every app that cares > > > > to support it. > > > > > > > Is it already in rawhide? > > > > The autoprovides generation is. Though it still needs to be tweaked > > before the F11 mass rebuild > > > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=994205 > > > Thanks for the info. Actually, Behdad just decided it needed a rewrite :p > > > If so, should I file bugs if say firefox does > > > not display some fonts on wikipedia title page and does not fire any > > > auto-installation dialog? > > > > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=467729 > > > Great, is there a bug for webkit filled as well? I can do that if that's > not the case. https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22621 Others are here http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Known_fonts_and_text_bugs Feel free to fill more if I missed some. > > > Legal issues are harder to solve, but at least in > > > fedora the fonts range is getting, thanks to your efforts, very > > > promising. > > > > Also please note that all the GPL fonts that do not explicitely declare > > the FSF fonts exception are safe wrt CSS-like referencing but *not* > > embedding. > > > Good point. Are there any efforts in 'fixing' those issues? “Fixing” is managing to reach the original authors, some of whom are not native English speakers, and explain them what the problem is and that they should really add the font exception to their licensing. It's slow work and I doubt it will ever be 100% completed. > > > It would definitely be > > > useful for people looking for specific design/unicode coverage. > > > > Font preview generators and how to embed previews in static wiki > > pages/PK are being discussed in the open font library list right now. > > > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/openfontlibrary/2009-February/001763.html > > > > The need has already been identified, but someone needs to do the coding > > work. Then I believe PK integration would follow quickly. > > > > http://bugzilla.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18928 > > > > It's the obvious next step after building a reasonable font package > > base. > > > > Sounds promising. The idea of having it displayed in packagekit sounds > even better than a wiki page with previews, though having both would be > best (you can afford to include more details in wiki + you can do more > fine-grained sort by unicode blocks coverage / language support). > > BTW. would it be worth making a feature page for these (and targeting it > at F11 or F12)? Font autoinstall is already a F11 feature. The current font repackaging work was proposed as a feature, but FESCO basically said “that's nice, please do it, but I don't think that should be marketed as a feature” If someone could be found work on the preview stuff I think it would definitely qualify as a feature. -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
_______________________________________________ Fedora-fonts-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
